Readers weigh in on guns issue

As an educator, art teacher and musical director for 30 years in the Patchogue-Medford school district, I received a phone call from a colleague of mine, who had seen a musical, Guys and Dolls, which I directed. He wanted to rent my sets and props for his production. I agreed and offered to transport and set up the items in his K-8 school in the Bronx. Upon arriving, I was taken aback by the sight of a 15-foot chain link fence which surrounded the school property. It had surveillance cameras at each corner. There was ONE WAY into this building. The front door was locked, I had to go through a metal detector and once through that, a staff member would buzz me in.

As I walked the halls, I saw little children hanging artwork up on the bulletin board and the interior of the school was just at it should be — these children were safe and enjoying learning. This is what is needed!

I was sickened by the Connecticut and Texas school massacres [“‘I don’t want it to happen again,’” News, June 9]. I’ve witnessed politicians and pundits ranting about gun laws, teachers armed, etc. Nothing has been done to prevent these atrocities from happening again! Gun laws won’t work, red flags for disturbed individuals won’t work. More than ever, our schools need to have a 15-foot perimeter fence with surveillance around the physical building and only ONE entrance with metal detectors.  — Richard Bonati, Yaphank

When South Dakota Sen. John Thune was asked why people would need an AR-15, he said it was used to kill prairie dogs. Louisiana Sen. Bill Cassidy answered the same question, saying it’s used to kill feral pigs. Rep. Ken Buck, from Colorado, answered that it is used to kill raccoons and foxes.

I want these men to go to Uvalde, look into the eyes of the parents of the 19 slaughtered children, and tell them that our right to own weapons of war to kill prairie dogs, pigs, and raccoons outweigh their children’s right to live. I want them to look at their tear-streaked faces and tell them that their children’s deaths are the price we have to pay to respect the Second Amendment which, apparently, our forefathers wrote to protect our property from pesky varmints. How sickening. How low. How did human decency become so warped?  — Roberta Comerchero, Commack

I am unable to comprehend why any American, other than the military or police, would need to own an assault rifle.
It is indeed very sad to believe that our great country would allow sales of these weapons only to further profits of those who manufacture and sell these weapons. Shame on us. — Jennifer Colbert, Westbury

The recent awful, deeply depressing shooting in Texas has politicians howling once again for gun control.

While I firmly believe in the Second Amendment, I also believe that the rights contained therein must be applied in a commonsensical way.

We have a right to drive a car, drive a truck, drive a semi, but each requires a license with graduation of the license dependent on the vehicle. One can obtain a license in most states at 16 years old, but that applies to the basic privilege of driving a car, not anything with wheels.

Current restrictive gun laws only restrict law-abiding people — not criminals. So here is a common-sense proposal:

All guns should require a license and that license should be indicative of the proficiency related to the specific weapon.

All applicants, after passing a background check, must enroll in and pass a gun safety course (within 30 days of license application) with professional training related to the specific weapon. After 30 days, assuming successful completion of the safety course, passing a background check and no “hits” on any of the restricted lists, a license is granted for the specific gun. If a current license holder desires to obtain another type of weapon, demonstration of proficiency with that weapon must be provided. — Jim La Rosa, Glen Cove

Columnist Cathy Young usually provides an evenhanded and reasonable approach to issues of the day. However, her argument against our country emulating other countries’ gun regulations was nonsensical [“The potential pitfalls of a war on guns,” Opinion, June 2].

According to Young, enacting measures that have reduced gun deaths in other developed nations won’t work here because we have more gun deaths to begin with. How does that make any sense?

Years ago, a relative in Italy asked, “Why do you Americans have an insane love of guns?” I had no answer. Today, I still don’t, only tears for the slaughtered children and scorn for gutless members of Congress. — Jim Morgo, Bayport

I’m not opposed to responsible gun owners having guns [“It’s not just about 2nd Amendment,” Letters, June 5]. But don’t we all agree that the person who shot children and teachers in their classrooms was not a responsible gun owner? Nor are those who shoot up grocery stores, hospitals, concerts, churches, temples, etc. Is this something we all agree on? If so, then can’t we all agree that we should have mechanisms and procedures in place to prevent irresponsible people from obtaining guns?

The first four words of the Second Amendment are: “A well regulated militia.” If you are opposed to regulation, then you do not support the Second Amendment. You just support guns. We need to stop putting guns over people. — Sharon Dershowitz, Levittown

I have a grandson turning 10 as he finishes third grade. Even as I feel the weight of what it might have been like if he was in a classroom in Uvalde where children were shredded by bullets designed for soldiers to devastate their enemies, I can’t really imagine it.

My grandson loves yellow sneakers. To hear Matthew McConaughey tell of a child who could only be identified after the massacre by her green sneakers, no one can be desensitized to this slaughter, and to the fact that we must take action to stop murders of our children [“McConaughey talks gun legislation at WH,” flash!, June 8].

Stop making it a Republican vs. Democrat issue. It must be made clear that a politician can be a good Republican and still support sensible measures to prevent the next mass murder of our children. That doesn’t mean insisting on meaningless legislation to stop or control mental illness. It means really doing something to prevent anyone from buying an automatic weapon that fires dozens of bullets in the blink of an eye — no less an 18-year old. Let’s get real, finally. — Len Axinn, Huntington Bay